One thing that I have noticed and that people have pointed out online a few times, is that there's often this assumption in media of "straight and cis until proven otherwise." I'll explain what I sometimes see: A lot of the times characters are 100% definitely straight until there is "substantial" evidence to show that they are not, and even with enough evidence, there will always be people finding loopholes to try and argue that it's a joke, or it's not true, or it "was just a phase" or whatnot. Often the burden of proof always falls onto one side, the "you have to find enough to prove for sure this character is gay/bi/trans (etc), but until you do, everyone is straight and cis by default. And even if you do, there are plenty of ways to invalidate it." Then again, you have people arguing that there is nothing wrong with assuming everyone is straight and cis until there is enough to show otherwise. And also on the other side, there are definitely people who don't do this, but I suppose they might be in the minority. Do you see this happening? What do you all think of it? Do you think this is damaging at all, and how so?
In a way, ironically, presuming everyone is 100% straight (unless irrefutable proof is offered) can be a good thing. Think of all the stereotypes that surround the gay community: the feminine voice, the sharp dresser, the girl that used flannel, the guy who uses his hands a lot to talk, the guy who prefers the arts. If we presume someone to be straight regardless of stereotypes it could very well do the gay community good in the sense that gay people who fit the stereotypes are not pigeonholed. It helps dissociate stereotypes of behavior from sexuality. Not sure if it makes sense.
Well, for me, it was a little harmful because I came out as gay, but some of my conservative friends put doubts in my mind about it. They asked me things like, "how do you know if you've never been with a guy?" Or... "you should try out both to be 100% sure. You never know." Or... "are you sure you want that lifestyle? You seem straight to me." I had doubted myself for the LONGEST time until I started ignoring everyone else and being confident with who I am. I mean, technically, at the time, I've never done anything with the same sex, so there's no evidence that I was gay, right? But still, the feelings remained. AlamoCity's point makes sense, too, though. So you can take this discussion in different directions.
Somewhat. I think there are people who assume everyone is straight and people who don't really think about sexuality at all. I mean, to be fair.. some of us assume that people are gay as in, gaydar, purely based on their looks alone. I think maybe.. there's some sort of curiosity when getting to know new people?
I don't really do this. Sometimes, I'll try to spot LGBT people myself. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I make it a rule to never voice it outloud to anyone, though. I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable.
Statistically, it makes a fuck ton of sense. That they are Cis and straight is many times more likely and so it makes more sense to assume that.
Uh, I think there's two sides to this. I've seen countless people get mad when someone assumes a person to be LGBT just because they act that way. Is it just as bad to assume they're straight/cis because they weren't "confirmed" to be LGBT? Unless the person comes out of the closet, then I don't think it matters as much whether or not we deny them being LGBT. We should believe what they say. If they don't say anything to confirm or deny their sexual orientation/gender identity, then I don't think wanting "proof" is such a bad thing.
Thanks for the replies, it's interesting to hear some different perspectives on this. I suppose each way of looking at it does make sense. Personally at the back of my mind I always thought more or less that the best option was to just not assume somebody else's sexuality or gender, but sometimes that's impractical and difficult to maintain. And over simplifying the thought process. I guess there's just many ways to go about looking at this.
It's safe to assume that the random stranger at the grocery store isn't going to punch me in the face. If the person starts acting violent and coming towards me then I may start to suggest that he may, in fact, be coming to punch me in the face. I could make a hundred weird examples like this. The point is, it's safe to assume someone is straight because most people are. There is nothing wrong with needing proof before you believe someone is part of a less statistically likely group. ---------- Post added 23rd Oct 2015 at 12:11 AM ---------- Basically.
This, but it's worth noting that even if you do deviate from that 'norm', without concrete evidence, people still want to lump you in as part of that norm. (speaking as someone who's 'come out' multiple times to the same person)
I think it's rather difficult having people assume you're straight no matter what. It's also come in handy for me though, in my old Catholic high school I used to be able to debate gay rights as much as I wanted and no one assumed anything. Would have been tricky if it came to light :icon_bigg It's a blessing around the general public, and a curse when it comes to actually dating.
